Ponderations on Cavitation (Updated with impressive results from a paper of 2018)

    • Official Post

    Probably you thought about this already, but have you repeated the Ca increase in different types of container (metal, glass, plastic, wood)?

    The basic idea is to use a container that can’t add anything that one intends to measure, obviously, and the choice in this case is PP beakers, which is the same used by Lu et al. PP can only add C and O, and that is sampled with the distilled water “blank”. Wood would introduce a lot of potential contaminants so is discarded from start. Stainless steel could also be used but it’s always preferred something transparent for observing the reaction. Glass is not recommended as it can also add contaminants and can always be a security hazard when used with a sonotrode.

  • The basic idea is to use a container that can’t add anything that one intends to measure, obviously, and the choice in this case is PP beakers, which is the same used by Lu et al. PP can only add C and O, and that is sampled with the distilled water “blank”. Wood would introduce a lot of potential contaminants so is discarded from start. Stainless steel could also be used but it’s always preferred something transparent for observing the reaction. Glass is not recommended as it can also add contaminants and can always be a security hazard when used with a sonotrode.

    All sounds great. I was just checking off the boxes.


    K to Ca seems like something possibly relatively easy to repeatedly test for, analytically, by common methods. If one were to set up to do it, anyways.

    • Official Post

    All sounds great. I was just checking off the boxes.


    K to Ca seems like something possibly relatively easy to repeatedly test for, analytically, by common methods. If one were to set up to do it, anyways.

    You are correct, no such thing as a simple experiment exists, but this is relatively simpler and we are set to do it.

  • Dear all,


    Thank Curbina have noted my presentation in ICCF-23.

    I presented and shared some up-do-date results we have done after ICCF-22 (Italy).

    As an engineering people, we have answered the question of existence of excess energy in kW scale through a heat transfer process involving cavitation from two machines we have built.


    It is interesting that our results are updated every day. Right after the presentation on June 11, my colleague got an exciting result in machine VCS-2 after tuning about 5 months. The replacement of new compressor can work better if tuned carefully.

    I revise my ppt file in p.13:

    • VCS-1 was tested for 2 years under various operating conditions.
    • Test result shows that COPx >1 (excess energy) exists and can be repeated. COPx = 1.29~1.97 (VCS-1).
      • But the compressor (Copeland) breaks down at the end of 2020 due to overheating.
    • Replacing compressor with different models (VCS-2), COPx is improved after tuning for about 5 months. Maximum COPx is 2.05.
    • P.15 slide in the revised ppt file shows some interesting results which needs more studies.

    The conclusion of the ICCF-23 presentation is summarized:

    • Excess energy in kW scale can be induced from simple heat exchanging process involving cavitation.
    • The test results of the heat-exchange systems (VCS and DHX) shows that COPx > 1 exists (maximum 2.55 in DHX) under some design and operating conditions, which makes water become fuel.
    • The excess energy index (COPx) is defined on the basis of 1st law of thermodynamic and can be used in the experimental data analysis to identify the existence of excess energy phenomena.
    • Material problems will be eventually encountered for the machines having excess energy with COPx >1 (for example, in DHX at COPx 2.55) since extremely high pressure or high temperature will be induced by LENR.
    • The phenomenon of COPx > 1 is related to cavitation, nano-bubbles implosion, and possible LENR. More research by scientists are needed.
    • As engineering people, we are focusing on the duplication of the best performance obtained during the studies to provide a reliable, simple and cheap machine to harvest energy from water.

    It is noticeable that the copper pipe surface seems forms CuO nanowires as seen from SEM results. This implies that high temperature 500-700oC was induced and causes copper pipe buckling.


    Last, material problems will be eventually encountered for the machines with excess energy (LERN) since extremely high pressure and high temperature will be induced by LENR. This is what we face at present. I hope that we will not meet the same serious problem as ITER, and the ordinary material technology (high heat conduction, high strength under high temperature and high pressure, easy manufacture) can solve this problem when COPx reaches 10.


    I revised the presentation of June 11 in ICCF-23 right after the conference (different from the video) and post here to share with LENR people.


    As I promised in ICCF-22/Italy, I have done my best in LENR research before my retirement (Aug 1, 2021).


    Thank all of you.

    • Official Post

    Much thanks for sharing these updates to your data and your presentation Dr. Huang!!! bjhuang.


    Much appreciated!


    I hope you can share more technical details of how to build, control and monitor this kind of set up with us eventually, thinking on independent replication. I really appreciate the results in the KW orders. Can you elaborate in the conditions that triggered the higher COPs and tell us if these conditions can be enhanced or controlled to certain extent? You mention that colder water was better, but was it the only condition that allowed higher COPs? What about water flow? Was the water distilled or tap water? Did you analyze the water for synthesis of new elements?


    You briefly mentioned that you experimented with copper foil In an ultrasound water bath, Can you share the thickness of the foil, as it looks heavily eroded and this is similar to some pitting found by Roger Stringham ( Roger S. Stringham ) in copper and Nickel in his experiments with ultrasound.


    I hope you can continue to work in this kind of research or at least to direct new researchers in this direction in the short term.

    Sorry for all the questions, your results are fascinating and beget much more questions, hope you can shed some more light.

  • Dear Curbina,


    thanks for your questions which are answered as follows:


    Q1: technical details of how to build, control and monitor this kind of set up with us eventually, thinking on independent replication.

    A1: We will publish a paper soon to disclose more details about our machine design and control for independent replication. From my experience, a little change in the design of the machine could change a lot in performance just like in our VCS and DHX machines. Fortunately, the performance of our machines can be replicated once all the operating conditions are set and well controlled.


    For VCS-2 (only change a new compressor in VCS-1), we took about 5 months to tune to reach a better result than VCS-1.

    For DHX-2, we only change the wall thickness and size of the double-pipe heat exchanger, the performance never reaches the results of DHX-1.


    The replication of LENR phenomena seems difficult even in a simple mechanical system without chemical phenomena. From my experience, I can realize how difficult in the replication of Fleischmann and Pons’s results. We must put more strength on this in future.


    Q2: conditions that triggered the higher COPs

    A2: The operating conditions triggering the higher COP is made by trials and errors. Sometimes, it happens by chance. The maximum COP (2.55) in DHX-1 was found under a “abnormal operation” by my student. Since LENR is an unknown new technique or new science, following the conventional thinking cannot get breakthrough. For example, we made a new DHX-2 with larger heat transfer surface (to obtain higher heat transfer rate) and thicker pipe wall (to avoid pipe rupture) from the fundamental principle of heat transfer and mechanics, it sounds right in heat transfer and strength of material, but not in LENR.


    Q3: colder water was better, but was it the only condition that allowed higher COPs? What about water flow? Was the water distilled or tap water? Did you analyze the water for synthesis of new elements?

    A3: This is not conclusive yet. For VCS-2, COP seems not so sensitive in inlet cold water temperature if tuned well.

    We used water from RO (reverse osmosis). We are arranging a measurement of water obtained in COP>1 to see if there is synthesis.


    Q4: experiment with copper foil in an ultrasound water bath, Can you share the thickness of the foil, as it looks heavily eroded and this is similar to some pitting found by Roger Stringham.

    A4: The copper foil thickness is 0.08mm. I put some additives in the water to result in a quite serious erosion as seen in my photo.


    Q5: I hope you can continue to work in this kind of research or at least to direct new researchers in this direction in the short term.

    A5: I am planning to do so. And surely need your support. Many thanks!!!





    • Official Post

    Dear bjhuang , much thanks for your thorough response to my enquiries! I look forward to your paper and to the results of water analysis, I think you will find some surprises there! Your work is really much appreciated, and I am really happy to know you intend to continue to do research in this fascinating field!

    • Official Post

    Bob Greenyer of the MFMP has this new video out

    External Content www.youtube.com
    Content embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.
    Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.
    where he proposes another, more conventional explanation of Huang's excess heat. Too long for me to watch, but maybe BJ Huang, or Curbina might have the time and interest.

    • Official Post

    Bob Greenyer of the MFMP has this new video out

    External Content www.youtube.com
    Content embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.
    Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.
    where he proposes another, more conventional explanation of Huang's excess heat. Too long for me to watch, but maybe BJ Huang, or Curbina might have the time and interest.

    Shane D. , I did not watch it entirely, just the last minutes but I can assure you that the explanation is not conventional at all. Following the line of thought developed by Bob Greenyer, Cavitation is a much more complex phenomena than just a collapsing bubble that smash things together.

    • Official Post

    I am about halfway the video and in general terms is what I expected within of what I have learnt from watching videos of the MFMP in these years, but the effect of the dissolved oxygen in the water as key to obtain results is something that even if has been talked before now makes much more sense considering that bjhuang mentioned a certain trend of having better results with colder water, and colder water can have more dissolved Oxygen in equilibrium with the atmosphere. The presence of Oxygen is what explains the end result of the transmutation rich in Carbon observed, following the logic developed.

  • Thanks Bob Greenyer taught me a great course of nuclear physics in his well-prepared video. Indeed, I learn a lot from this and try to be a good student of him. However, I need to take a while to understand all his precious opinions. Just like I took about one and half years to be able to answer some of his many questions given during ICCF-22 in Italy, 2019.


    As an engineer, all the engineering approach needs scientific basis. Unfortunately, LENR is an unknown new technique or new science and following the conventional thinking may not get engineering breakthrough. But ‘old’ scientific basis is still very important to give engineering approach a right guidance.


    I do appreciate very much and need some more good ideas for us to realize the engineering application of LENR very soon.